Legal Opinion · Concurrence

In Re Initiative Petition No. 347 State Question No. 639

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided June 11, 1991No. 76109Published

1ConcurrenceOpala, Chief Justice

I concur generally in today’s pronouncement that the petition under consideration qualifies for submission to a vote of the electorate. By my concurrence today I do not intend to be understood as receding from my continued and unswerving commitment to Threadgill v. Cross.1 Threadgill teaches that the conformity of a measure’s content to constitutional norms may not be the subject of a judicial examination in advance of the initiative petition’s adoption. Preadoption constitutional challenges may address only vitiating infirmities in the initiative process itself as the sanctioned people’s…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley AuthoritySupreme Court of the United States · 1936
  2. Immigration & Naturalization Service v. ChadhaSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  3. Threadgill v. Cross, Secretary of StateSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
  4. Smith v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1987
  5. In Re Initiative Petition No. 344, State Question No. 630Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1990

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API